GH6 - Three things I hate about it

[BobKo]

I really like my GH6 and use it all the time. It is an extremely capable and somewhat misunderstood camera, but it is absolutely the best I have ever had for video production -- and it's pretty good at taking photos, too. However, there are some things that Panasonic did with the GH6 that drive me a little crazy every time I see them... which is pretty often.

Meanwhile, I have a regular vlog called "The Bobcast" in which I discuss random topics, and the latest was on the subject of three things that I hate about the GH6. You can see it here:

Do you agree? Am I making mountains out of molehills? Do you have your own list of things that you hate about your camera? Feel free to share here or in the comments on my video.

And thanks for watching.

 

[hotchkiss]

As an iteration of the GH series, the GH6 has leapt far ahead. I do wish the VF was higher rez. Is the GH6 VF something I "hate" ? No, it's actually an improvement over the GH5, albeit slightly.

I would absolutely like a firmware update to provide a more adequate warning for the card filling up. The warning is late, and it's easy to overlook compared to the GH5. I've almost been burned twice now, having run out of card capacity without noticing it until it was too late.

I'm very pleased with the S1H features added to the GH6, the color is excellent, and the AF is indeed significantly improved over the GH5. That said, I'm not much of an AF user. It's pretty much what I hoped it would be- a M43 S1H

....Mini rant against Panasonics missed opportunities with M43, or is it strategic obsolescence?

My biggest gripe/ concern is that I'm concerned that Panasonic is intentionally letting the M43/ video cameras languish, refusing to exploit the unique benefits of the format with a video/ cinema centric form factor and a more complete video centric lens lineup. Yes, I know the 10-25 and the 25-50 are amazing pieces of glass- I have both. They were however very late in introducing these lenses to the system. Panasonic M43 still needs a 24-120-ish equivalent pro zoom, changing lenses for b-roll shooting is rather... shall we say... un-enjoyable.

I also have a DVX200, I'm still using it with a NinjaV for corporate green screen and I still use it for b-roll when the circumstances are right. IMO, the sensor was pretty dated when it was released. At this point I think twice about using it for doco style corporate footage- funky ergos, portly weight, 8 bit files etc... If I had my way I'd love to see an updated DVX200 using the GH6 sensor, a constant 2.8 lens (even with a shorter zoom range) and put on Weight Watchers routine. Better yet, I'll take a AF200. I'm a realist though, my guess is that either is never never gonna happen. FF is the new-new thing. M43 video will strictly be a hybrid camera/ consumer thing from here on out.

My gut tells me that Panasonic is going to let the M43 video centric cameras atrophy into oblivion and sail off over the horizon- FF mania is in full bloom... :-O. Panasonic pro-ish M43 cameras are dying by a thousand cuts. Regardless, I can't get excited about buying yet another DSLR, regardless of the sensor format. This will be my last hybrid barring an unforeseen change of opinion or new model developments. Of course I 'd love to be proven dead wrong... at NAB ;-).

In the mean time my GH6 is getting a lot of play and will continue to do so.

 

[DLD]

My gut tells me that Panasonic is going to let the M43 video centric cameras atrophy into oblivion and sail off over the horizon-

They said in a recent interview that they're thinking of "MFT for young users". Which is a euphemism for the entry level. But why would anyone buy a 20-25 MPX camera for ~ $1,000-$1,500 when one can get a smartphone with a 200 MPX unit for the same price?

 

[BobKo]

But why would anyone buy a 20-25 MPX camera for ~ $1,000-$1,500 when one can get a smartphone with a 200 MPX unit for the same price?

Or when they can get an S5 version for a couple hundred dollars more?

 

[morgan_moore]

It not hard - if you want to shoot wildlife or anything long carrying a 150 not a 300 rocks. Ff lenses are so massive these days

 

[DLD]

Or when they can get an S5 version for a couple hundred dollars more?

They'll probably go lower in their MFT lineups. I wouldn't be surprised to see a bunch of $700 models out. But looking at the smartphone camera rating list by DxO, I just don't see any reason for a non-pro to go ILC. New smartphones have higher resolution, decent 4K and a built-in zoom that's more than adequate for an everyday user. And it's always in your pocket (for most folks).

 

[hotchkiss]

They said in a recent interview that they're thinking of "MFT for young users". Which is a euphemism for the entry level. But why would anyone buy a 20-25 MPX camera for ~ $1,000-$1,500 when one can get a smartphone with a 200 MPX unit for the same price?

I read that interview as well. It makes absolute sense- it always has, mobile phones or not. This has always been one of M43's most sensical markets, even though Panasonic has suffered some amnesia about this. There are many reasons why someone would buy a 20-25 MPX camera for 1k-1.5k over a smartphone. Although price considerations may have more sway for consumers, neither pros nor consumers make purchase decisions on price alone.

Panasonics epiphany about the M43 for the consumer market is the kind of thing that makes me beat my head against the wall. Small size and all of the advantages of an ILC was always foundational for this format, regardless of the inroads that phones have made. Those value propositions, have remained intact, in spite of market competition and new tech.

In the professional realm, Panasonics error is similar. Previous to the abundance of capable hybrid FF systems, Panny's innovation and feature sets had no equal. Now, with the flood of FF hybrids, trying to compete in the still-photo realm is a tough sell (at least to the consumer masses) . With the exception of certain types of scenarios, I've been quite happy with the still output from M43, it's deficiencies are often overblown by folks who will never ever even push the formats limits. That said, for pure IQ/ spec sheet considerations, FF wins. For this reason it seems a mistake to try and compete in this sandbox past a certain point. Panasonic, play to your strengths- come out with a motion specific M43 power house camera. Forget making it hybrid, abandon the dumpster fire of a form factor that is the DSLR. Regrettably, we got the BGH1 instead- seriously? It's like Panasonic doesn't truly believe in their own market advantage, they are constantly chasing their own tail.

I'm not really into market prognostication, this is more of a rant and a journal entry of sorts. Maybe a M43 pro video post mortem? This is my therapy... Kubler-Ross steps of grieving and all that. Judging by Panasonics seeming abandonment of the (non-hybrid) pro video market, my lament is less relevant than ever. It would appear that Panny is going to limit their pro video aspirations to pro-ish and consumer FF hybrid systems. The ship has sailed for the kind of M43 camera I would like, due in no small part to Panasonics lack of commitment to a Pro M43 platform. They've made that very clear in their marketing and executive interviews, relegating M43 to prosumers and "content creators" and FF to professionals. A stupid marketing calculation imo, denigrate your own product though arbitrary stratification.

I'm just very sad to see this happen. I adore the M43 system for pro work and personal purposes. On the pro video side of things, It appears to be going the way of the Dodo bird. Panasonic is certainly creating that perception, whether intentionally or not.

On the contrary, If NAB contradicts my conclusions, I'll gladly eat crow and my hat.

 

[DLD]

From the technological POV, MFT is perfectly capable of being a professional level camera and achieving quality suitable for the big screen production. But the cartel decided - and not unreasonably so - to divide its product in tiers according to the sensor size : the 1 inch and below has virtually disappeared, making the MFT entry level, APS-C consumer, full frame enthusiast and pro, and medium format pro for stills only. This is what happened when the competition is "managed".

PS. Vivo V90 Pro that was released a few months ago has a 1" sensor. It isn't rated by the DxO to be the best (overall score 140) but it is said to have excellent video. Their top model is Honor Magic5Pro with a 152 grade.

What is more interesting is that iPhone 12, as an example, that was released only two years ago, is rated at 117, showing a dramatic improvement in camera quality on smartphones.

 

[hotchkiss]

Yep, the old DOF canard... :-0 . With few exceptions, my MFT lenses have provided the shallow DOF I've needed. I have a 42.5 f1.2 and first gen 12-35 and 35-100 and the dynamic duo 10-25/ 25-50. Outside of difficulty getting shallow DOF on wider medium shots (42.5 Noct excepted) , no complaints.

There are several reasons to explain the decline and elimination of smaller formats, and the ascension of FF. Your cartel thesis is not one of them, sorry I don't buy it. That's not to say that Sony doesn't exert pressure, as the goliath sensor designer and manufacturer. Pressure yes, limits yes, cartel no. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I am in total agreement on the viability of smaller sensors. I have long thought that FF for the average consumer is silly- marketing, groupthink, spec sheet slavery and me-tooism rules the day.

Imagine what M43 (or 1 inch) sensors could pull off if a fraction of the software and processing goodness of a top tier phone was applied to the format.

Maybe the masses may reconsider the necessity and advantage of FF sensors if this kind of tech is ever applied to smaller formats.

 

[DLD]

There are several reasons to explain the decline and elimination of smaller formats, and the ascension of FF. Your cartel thesis is not one of them, sorry I don't buy it. That's not to say that Sony doesn't exert pressure, as the goliath sensor designer and manufacturer. Pressure yes, limits yes, cartel no. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Sorry, but I consider the cartel thesis having the prima facie evidence. A competitive market would have a ton more cameras with a far greater variety of models and specifications ... and more than two sensor manufacturers.